Thread by @Raf_Epstein

REALLY LONG THREAD - from me on @abcmelbourne y'day

You can’t say we weren't warned. But if you don't accept the reality of climate science would you accept the warnings?

In 2008, Ross Garnaut was looking at climate change for the Rudd Government.

His prediction – based on the science - was eerily accurate. "Fire seasons will start earlier, end later and be more intense. This effect increases over time but should be directly observable by 2020." That was over a decade ago.

webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/2019050908…

One year later, in 2009, the CSIRO echoed a similar warning. "Modelled climate projections show that much of southern Australia may become warmer and drier.” We just had the warmest and driest year on record, according to BOM.

environment.gov.au/climate-change…

What else did the CSIRO say in 2009? "This modelling suggests that, by 2020, extreme fire danger days in SE Aust may occur 5 to 65 % more often" A prediction of very many more extreme fire danger days, which is what our fire chiefs say is now happening.

Four years ago, those who co-ordinate aircraft fighting fire, were asking for change. They wanted a national large air tanker fleet. They were backed by a Senate inquiry. But the federal government knocked back the concept.

smh.com.au/politics/feder…

The PM met with fire chiefs in August. This is what they told him. Oz Seasonal Bushfire Outlook. The areas with above normal fire potential are marked in red. Almost exactly the areas that burnt.

bnhcrc.com.au/hazardnotes/63

If you have people in your ranks -in media- who don't accept the science, does that impact policy?

DPM Michael McCormack, says it's the ravings of woke, inner city lunatics, when the concerns are raised by the Greens.

One govt Senator accused BOM of adjusting records as part of some global conspiracy. Govt MP Craig Kelly said the link between bushfires & climate change is "a pack of lies." Resources Min Matt Canavan gave a speech (4yrsago) called – Climate Change Science is Uncertain.

Yes arson, accidents, kids.. etc ok. Hazard reduction is a good tool. But fire chiefs say the big blazes are leaping straight over burns conducted a short time ago. And most of the big blazes aren't arson

So why reject the science and push so hard on issues like this?

Does it make any difference if Oz cuts its emissions? @1petermartin says it can. theconversation.com/in-fact-theres…

2013 to 2016 almost every single bit of China's extra electricity production came from non-emitting source.
Driven - in part only - by pressure from countries like Oz.

Oz emissions are dropping by 4% over the next decade, by 16% over the Paris period, and we only hit the 26-28% target using carryover credits. This method was only suggested under Morrison. And one big reason Turnbull went was his emissions policy was fiercely opposed ..

Climate change makes bushfires more likely. And more dangerous. But if you don’t accept that science, can you heed the warnings? Can you respond properly? And if we know people inside govt don’t accept the reality of science, is that holding us back?